宪法法院判决与最高法院判决在限制选举权问题上的意见分歧

Qaidah Bazilah Bazlaa, D. Setiawan, Feri Amsari
{"title":"宪法法院判决与最高法院判决在限制选举权问题上的意见分歧","authors":"Qaidah Bazilah Bazlaa, D. Setiawan, Feri Amsari","doi":"10.25077/llr.1.2.117-127.2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In general elections, the public has the right, namely, not to vote, and the right to be elected. The right to be elected is the right of citizens to be elected as members of deliberative bodies or representatives of the people in a general election. Article 240 paragraph (1) letter g of the General Election Law regulates restrictions on the right to vote for former corruption convicts. Regarding the norms in this article, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court have different views. This is formulated in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 87/PUU-XX/2022 and the Supreme Court Decision Number 46P/HUM/2018. This article analyzes the views of Constitutional Justices and Supreme Court Justices regarding the norms in article 240, paragraph (1) letter g. The purpose of this article is to find out how voting rights are limited for former corruption convicts. This article uses a normative juridical research method. The research results found that first, restrictions on the right to vote for former convicts may be carried out in the interests of ensuring the freedom of disadvantaged groups. Second, in deciding a decision, the judge is obliged to explore, follow and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that exist in society as well as pay attention to the juridical aspect.","PeriodicalId":489319,"journal":{"name":"Lareh Law Review","volume":"112 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perbedaan Pandangan Terhadap Pembatasan Hak Dipilih Antara Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dengan Putusan Mahkamah Agung\",\"authors\":\"Qaidah Bazilah Bazlaa, D. Setiawan, Feri Amsari\",\"doi\":\"10.25077/llr.1.2.117-127.2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In general elections, the public has the right, namely, not to vote, and the right to be elected. The right to be elected is the right of citizens to be elected as members of deliberative bodies or representatives of the people in a general election. Article 240 paragraph (1) letter g of the General Election Law regulates restrictions on the right to vote for former corruption convicts. Regarding the norms in this article, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court have different views. This is formulated in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 87/PUU-XX/2022 and the Supreme Court Decision Number 46P/HUM/2018. This article analyzes the views of Constitutional Justices and Supreme Court Justices regarding the norms in article 240, paragraph (1) letter g. The purpose of this article is to find out how voting rights are limited for former corruption convicts. This article uses a normative juridical research method. The research results found that first, restrictions on the right to vote for former convicts may be carried out in the interests of ensuring the freedom of disadvantaged groups. Second, in deciding a decision, the judge is obliged to explore, follow and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that exist in society as well as pay attention to the juridical aspect.\",\"PeriodicalId\":489319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lareh Law Review\",\"volume\":\"112 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lareh Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25077/llr.1.2.117-127.2023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lareh Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25077/llr.1.2.117-127.2023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在普选中,公众有权利,即不投票,也有被选举的权利。被选举权是指公民在普选中被选举为协商机构成员或者人民代表的权利。《总选举法》第240条第1款(g)项规定了对前腐败罪犯的投票权的限制。宪法法院和大法院对该条规定的规范有不同的看法。这在宪法法院第87/PUU-XX/2022号判决书和大法院第46P/HUM/2018号判决书中有所规定。本文分析了宪法法官和大法院法官对第240条第(1)款g项中的规范的看法。本文的目的是找出前腐败罪犯的投票权是如何受到限制的。本文采用规范的法学研究方法。研究结果发现,首先,从保障弱势群体自由的利益出发,可能会对前罪犯的投票权进行限制。第二,法官在作出判决时,有义务探索、遵循和理解社会上存在的法律价值和正义感,并关注司法方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perbedaan Pandangan Terhadap Pembatasan Hak Dipilih Antara Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dengan Putusan Mahkamah Agung
In general elections, the public has the right, namely, not to vote, and the right to be elected. The right to be elected is the right of citizens to be elected as members of deliberative bodies or representatives of the people in a general election. Article 240 paragraph (1) letter g of the General Election Law regulates restrictions on the right to vote for former corruption convicts. Regarding the norms in this article, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court have different views. This is formulated in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 87/PUU-XX/2022 and the Supreme Court Decision Number 46P/HUM/2018. This article analyzes the views of Constitutional Justices and Supreme Court Justices regarding the norms in article 240, paragraph (1) letter g. The purpose of this article is to find out how voting rights are limited for former corruption convicts. This article uses a normative juridical research method. The research results found that first, restrictions on the right to vote for former convicts may be carried out in the interests of ensuring the freedom of disadvantaged groups. Second, in deciding a decision, the judge is obliged to explore, follow and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that exist in society as well as pay attention to the juridical aspect.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信